Bitcoin Forum

   I read about bitcoin ecological system. That system, in my opinion, isn't ecological. With not so many miners that system can to work, and we can to ignore loss energy, but with many miners, we can't to ignore it.
   Do someone can make a new more ecological bitcoin alternative, or that system already done??
 

bitcoins impact on the world eco system due to electricity use is small, in comparison.

bitcoin (world wide) 145mwatt per day
las vegas (one city) 5000mwatt per day.

other protocols use less electric. such as proof-of-stake. but these do not protect their blockchain, using difficult 'puzzles' (excuse my laymans use of description)

Proof -of stake is weak security and us only to make the rich, richer. (those that hold most coin get most reward). with bitcoin the electric is used to create difficult blocks that a simple computer could not break.

Oh my goodness STOP WITH THESE THREADS.

I have answered 2 in the past day saying how the network uses 2.6% of Las Vegas and another small fraction of New York, so there isn't an ecological problem.

There have been calculations, people even saying how little power is consumed, etc.

Why are these STILL being made? STOP!

There are alternative cryptocurrencies that do not use mining, using a "proof of stake" scheme
instead of Bitcoin's proof of work.

However, they have security limitations that are possibly quite serious, and
are also questionable as far as their initial distribution, since no work was
done to acquire the currency.

Learn first (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#Is_it_not_a_waste_of_energy.3F).  Then talk.

The things you are saying are inaccurate and misleading.  You have been misinformed.

In other words created out of nothing to advantage a few elete! sounds familiar (www.philanthropyandphilosophy.com)

The best thing we can do for the environment is promote Bitcoin so that all of these third world countries can grow their economies and modernize.

Manufacturing Fiat wastes more energy, incredibly more (i have answered this kind of threats three or four times). But if you are really worried about it, perhaps in a few years more efficient  and cheap mining hardware will be arrived...

I'm not sure how modernizing something will be more energy efficient? what is more energy efficient? Tokyo or a village?
I'm not saying 3rd world should not modernize

>yakamoto
if you want these threads to stop then stop bumping them up with your replies

http://www.ilo.org/oshenc/part-vii/environmental-health-hazards/item/498-developing-countries-and-pollution


Third world countries still rely on diesel, wood, etc. for fuel. They aren't even close to thinking about solar, wind or hydro due to the economic investment required.

There is no competition to bitcoin yet. Doesn't mean there won't be one in the future.

highly unlikely most 'competition' are trying to do the same thing as Bitcoin which will never make it any better. it would need to be a unique idea to beat it now.

Like Andreas said, BTC is not AOL. BTC is IPv4.

HYPER does not have mining at all and is 100% low energy. Anyone can run HYPER on their desktop computer or laptop and earn 5% monthly interest for supporting the network. No mining required https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=624651.0

You can also get HYPER for free here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=695339

I wonder why people can't let it go.  The current financial system is not good, these bankers fund wars.  The last thing you should be worried about is something like this.  If you really cared about the environment you would take a look at the big picture.  If the world goes into some type of nuclear war or worse will a few miners don't even come close to the loss of life and nuclear fallout around the planet.  Bitcoin at least represents change and wakes people up so the ends justify the means IMO.

Proof of Stake is ecological, but unfortunatelly not secure.
Proof of Work is best option imo and every improvenment in J/GHs is helping ecology.

+1 for this. Yet nobody complains on how much electricity Las Vegas spends.

by far the best two. if you have any questions ask over on the threads cos it will only turn into a big debate between PoW people and PoS people and iv had my fill of those for a while. :)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=654845.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=587007.0

not true

let me guess, "its not secure because of "history attack" and "nothing at stake attack"

thats not true. atleast not in relation to nxt.

proof?

read this thread

https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/bounty-for-successful-nothing-at-stake-attack/40/

vitalik buterin of ethereum agrees that nxt does not have these faults and does things much better than the majority think.

read the thread

It totally doesn't matter how efficient or affordable mining hardware is. We could power the whole network with a handful USB miners. It's the difficulty of scaling up a mining operation that makes the hash power rare, and thus a legitimate factor of gauging your commitment (which therefore can't be arbitrarily high). That's the core of the proof of work principle that makes bitcoin's distributed consensus possible.